This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1572949584837767173
The details aren't fully know yet but it's a bombshell of a news story for any sports fan, especially the NBA. It seems to be that the coach of the Boston Celtics had a completely consensual sexual relationship with a member of the Celtics staff and now the coach is getting suspended for the entire season. Not sure about discipline for the woman.
The Celtics went to the Finals last year (Heat fan gripe: the refs were the reason the Celts made it past the Heat in the Eastern Conference Finals - I've never been as heated {ha!} In my life over anything sports related in 30 years of watching as I have over this series) and this guy is considered THE up and coming coach.
He's married also.
What I'm seeing a lot of online is something along the lines of: you can't have a relationship with a subordinate, he deserves this, if not to be fired outright. Personally, I feel the statement of ' it's non of your damn business ' would have sufficed. This would apply to this guy on the Celtics or some head honcho at GNC or Walmart.
What does The Motte think?
This might be crass but;
Why get power if not to use it to have sex? 14 year old me wanted to be a CEO to smash the hottest chicks, and many of them.
The whole "power imbalance" argument never made sense to me, like yeah no shit? Thats the whole point of the power inbalance!
It sounds like a made up rule/norm by jelouse women, its like "oh yeah please be rich and powerful, but dont use it to attract women" You cant have your cake and eat it too, men work themselves to the bone and stab each others back for power because it gets women!
In turn women are also tools in the game, to show to other men how much better you are for getting hotter/classier women than they can.
I used to believe what you say, but I don't think it makes sense. Simply physically getting into the panties of a hot woman isn't worth grinding yourself to the bone. It must be seen and known. By other people. Simply being powerful, being respected, feared, obeyed, exerting control over the course of things feels good as an end to itself not just as a means to get your dick wet physically in private, behind closed doors.
Success with women is an ego confirmation/validation that you are important, high status etc. That's not to say that powerful men don't enjoy the sex part, but it's not the only goal.
Human motivation is multi-faceted. We enjoy eating food, enjoy relaxing, enjoy accumulating resources and status, enjoy sex, enjoy being accepted as part of communities and friend groups, enjoy having good shelter and warm clothes etc. There's no need to pick one and claim that they others are just proxies for that one.
I absolutely drag my wife to work events for precisely this reason. Of course earning respect without them knowing what she looks like is a constant process, but there's a small but marked difference between people who have met her and those who haven't.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link